Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Limits on an Exotic Higgs Decay From a Recast ATLAS Four-Lepton Analysis

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read By recasting the ATLAS Z→dark-photon search, this paper places 95% confidence limits on the exotic Higgs decay H→aa→VVVV between 4×10⁻⁵ and 1×10⁻⁴, arguing these are the best limits so far on this signal.

desk verdict A genuinely new recast that likely sets the best current limits on H->aa->VVVV, but the quoted numbers rest on an unvalidated constant-efficiency transfer at low ma. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.14452 v1 pith:DSTYEKQR submitted 2024-12-19 hep-ph hep-ex

Junyi Cheng , Rabia Husain , Lingfeng Li , Matthew J. Strassler This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords exoticHiggsdecayshiddenvalleydarkphotoneight-fermionfinalstateATLASrecastbranchingfractionlimitH→aa→VVVVfour-leptonanalysis
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper aims to show that a public ATLAS search, originally written for $Z$ bosons decaying to three dark photons, already constrains a different exotic Higgs decay mode: $H \to aa \to VVVV$, where two intermediate scalars each produce two spin-one particles that decay to fermion pairs. Because the ATLAS selection accepts four-lepton events with $m_{4\ell} < m_Z - 5\,\mathrm{GeV}$ rather than requiring $m_{4\ell} = m_H$, it has sensitivity to $H \to 8f$ decays that dedicated four-lepton Higgs searches would miss. Reproducing the ATLAS efficiencies with two constant recalibration factors, the authors recast the analysis and obtain 95% confidence upper limits on the branching fraction (decay probability) $\mathrm{BR}(H\to aa\to VVVV)$ in the range $4\times10^{-5}$ to $1\times10^{-4}$ over the probed $(m_a,m_V)$ grid, assuming $V$ has dark-photon-like leptonic branching fractions and $\mathrm{BR}(a\to VV)=1$. If correct, these are the strongest limits obtained so far on this signal, and they narrow the viable parameter space of hidden-sector models coupled to the Higgs.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the ATLAS signal region itself, defined by at least four isolated leptons forming two same-flavor/opposite-charge pairs with $m_{4\ell} < m_Z - 5\,\mathrm{GeV}$, pair-mass ratio $m_{34}/m_{12} > 0.85$, and dilepton masses away from the $\Upsilon$ resonances and below 5 GeV. Because this window is set below the $Z$ mass rather than at the Higgs mass, it is kinematically open to $H\to aa\to VVVV$ events. The efficiency transfer is carried by two fitted constants, $r_\mathrm{lep}=0.78$ per lepton and $r_\mathrm{trig}=0.81$, which convert truth-level acceptance into reconstruction-level efficiency; limits are then computed with the CL$_s$ method on the two leading $\bar m_{\ell\ell}\equiv (m_{\ell_1\ell_2}+m_{\ell_3\ell_4})/2$ bins per mass point, with log-normal nuisance parameters for the signal efficiency and background.

What would settle it

Repeat the recast at $(m_a,m_V)=(20,7)\,\mathrm{GeV}$ using a full detector simulation, or ATLAS's published lepton reconstruction/identification efficiencies parameterized by $p_T$ and by the separation between nearby leptons, in place of the constant $r_\mathrm{lep}=0.78$; if the resulting signal efficiency falls below the value used here by more than the quoted systematic uncertainty, the low-$m_a$ limits are too strong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the ATLAS $Z\to 6f$ analysis, after being reproduced with a simplified simulation, can be reinterpreted as a limit on $H\to aa\to VVVV\to 8f$. The reproduction uses truth-level $Z\to A'h_D\to A'A'A'$ simulation with $r_\mathrm{lep}=0.78$ per lepton and $r_\mathrm{trig}=0.81$ as constant recalibration factors, matching the ATLAS Monte Carlo study's overall signal efficiencies to within about 8% and reproducing ATLAS's limits within a factor of 1.5–1.9. Applying the same tuned efficiencies to simulated Higgs production, with cross sections reweighted to LHC Higgs working group recommendations and a combined $\sigma_\epsilon \simeq 0.59$ systematic uncertainty, the recast yields 95% CL upper limits on $\mathrm{BR}(H\to aa\to VVVV)$ between $4\times10^{-5}$ and $1\times10^{-4}$ over the scanned $(m_a, m_V)$ plane. The limits are weakest at small $m_a$, where the boost of $a$ collimates its decay products so that leptons fail isolation cuts and $m_{4\ell}$ is pushed toward the kinematic ceiling $m_H - 2m_V$, beyond the search's $m_Z$ window. With $V$ treated as a dark photon and $\mathrm{BR}(a\to VV)=1$, the paper states that these are, to its knowledge, the best limits obtained so far on such a signal.

Load-bearing premise

The limits rest on the assumption that one per-lepton efficiency factor of 0.78 and one trigger factor of 0.81, fitted at a single benchmark point, remain valid across the whole $(m_a,m_V)$ grid, even though at low $m_a$ the leptons are more collimated and the isolation requirement would reject more of them than this constant factor can describe.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Hidden-sector models predicting $\mathrm{BR}(H\to aa\to VVVV)$ above roughly $10^{-4}$ with two or more leptonic $V$ decays are excluded by existing 139 fb$^{-1}$ ATLAS data.
  • The kinematic-pairing search improves on the earlier multilepton-counting recast by close to an order of magnitude, moving the bound from the $10^{-3}$ range to the $10^{-5}$–$10^{-4}$ range.
  • Because the selection uses $m_{4\ell}<m_Z-5\,\mathrm{GeV}$, it probes $H\to 8f$ configurations that a search requiring $m_{4\ell}=m_H$ would not accept.
  • If the $V\to\ell\ell$ branching fractions differ from those of a dark photon, the limits approximately rescale by the square of the ratio of leptonic branching fractions whenever four-lepton events dominate.
  • The observed excess in ATLAS's five-or-more-lepton search is disfavored as an explanation coming from $H\to 8f$ with four resonant $V$'s; resonant equal-mass-pair searches are more sensitive for such signatures.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The closeness of the two-constant-factor reproduction (within 8% on efficiency, 1.5–1.9 on limits) suggests that public LHC searches can often be recast with a very coarse detector model, but the roughly 59% systematic uncertainty in this paper is dominated by that coarseness; a full simulation would likely sharpen the quoted bounds.
  • The paper's own diagnosis at low $m_a$ implies a concrete improvement: if isolation cones excluded other leptons, the $m_a$ dependence would flatten and the low-mass limits should drop below $4\times10^{-5}$; this is testable with the same public search.
  • The same pipeline should transfer to confining hidden-sector models with dark showers, where the paper notes much larger theoretical uncertainties are expected because hadronization in non-QCD-like sectors is poorly understood.
  • Because the bound applies to any promptly decaying spin-one particle with dark-photon-like leptonic branching fractions, it also constrains composite 'hidden rho' interpretations, not only elementary dark photons.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper recasts the ATLAS search for Z -> hD A' -> A'A'A' with four-lepton final states (ATLAS PRL 131, 251801) to constrain the exotic Higgs decay H -> aa -> VVVV -> 8f. The authors first reproduce ATLAS's Monte Carlo study for Z -> 6f using truth-level simulation with two constant recalibration factors, rlep = 0.78 per lepton and rtrig = 0.81 for triggering, and then benchmark their limit-setting procedure against ATLAS's published limits, finding agreement within a factor of 1.5 to 1.9. They then apply the same methodology to H -> aa -> VVVV, assuming dark-photon-like branching fractions for V and BR(a -> VV) = 1, and obtain 95% CL limits on BR(H -> aa -> VVVV) of roughly 4e-5 to 1e-4 across the (ma, mV) grid. The central numerical claim, and especially its dependence on ma and mV, rests on transferring detector-level efficiency corrections fitted at one mass point in a different topology to the H -> 8f final state.

Significance. If the central claim holds, this is the strongest limit on H -> aa -> VVVV -> 8f, improving on earlier multilepton recasts by roughly an order of magnitude, and it demonstrates that a published four-lepton analysis can be repurposed for novel multi-resonance signatures. The paper is transparent about its crude detector modeling, makes use of public ATLAS background bins and MC benchmarks rather than fitting to the Higgs-signal hypothesis, and is therefore not circular. The authors also give credit to, and compare with, competing recasts and newer ATLAS/CMS searches. The main significance risk is that the quoted numerical range, especially at low ma and mV, may be systematically too strong because the efficiency corrections are transferred from a different topology.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4 and Section 3.1.1, Tables 1-2] The central claim in Section 4, that BR(H -> aa -> VVVV) is bounded between 4e-5 and 1e-4, depends directly on applying rlep = 0.78 and rtrig = 0.81, fitted to the ATLAS Z -> 6f MC study at m_hD = 50 GeV, to the H -> 8f topology over the full (ma, mV) grid. This transfer is not validated. The paper itself notes in Sections 4 and 5 that at low ma the a is more boosted than the hD in Z -> 6f, so its decay products are more collimated and more likely to fail ATLAS isolation, and that the isolation variables include energy from other leptons. A constant per-lepton recalibration cannot model this geometry-dependent isolation efficiency. The heuristic that mZ/6 ~ mH/8 only speaks to average lepton pT, not to isolation-cone occupancy or trigger turn-on behavior. Without a detector-level cross-check, or at least a conservative topology- and mass-dependent efficiency model, the numerical limits in low-ma, low-mV regions are not established.
  2. [Section 3.2, Eq. (3.5)] The large systematic sigma_epsilon = 0.59 in Eq. (3.5) broadens the signal-efficiency nuisance distribution, but it cannot correct a bias in the central value of the transferred efficiency. If the true H -> 8f efficiency at low (ma, mV) is lower than the Z -> 6f-calibrated value by, say, 30-50%, the resulting limit on BR(H -> aa -> VVVV) weakens by a comparable factor, and the quoted range 4e-5 to 1e-4 would be over-optimistic in that region. The paper should either demonstrate that the bias is negligible with an independent check or present limits under a more conservative efficiency assumption, reporting the dependence of the final range on that assumption.
  3. [Section 3.1.2 and Figure 4] The trigger/cut-flow ordering test in Section 3.1.2 is performed for Z -> 6f at m_hD = 50 GeV only and does not address the H -> 8f topology, where the lepton pT spectrum and the trigger turn-on can differ at low ma. Similarly, the validation against ATLAS's final Z -> 6f limits in Figure 4, while useful, uses the same fitted recalibration factors and therefore cannot validate their extrapolation to H -> 8f. A separate validation of the H -> 8f signal efficiency, at least at benchmark points spanning low and high (ma, mV), is needed before the quoted central limits can be taken at face value.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Title/header] The title page contains 'recast a TLAS', which appears to be a corruption of 'recast ATLAS'; the grammar in the abstract, 'limit on a exotic Higgs decay mode', should also be corrected.
  2. [Section 4] There is a typo in 'PYTHIA 3.811' which should presumably read 'PYTHIA 8.311'; note also that Section 3.1.1 uses PYTHIA 8.308, and the version difference is not discussed.
  3. [Section 5] The word 'Acouting' in 'Acouting both for the statistical uncertainty' is a typo for 'Accounting'.
  4. [References] Reference [17] is incomplete, ending with a comma and no arXiv identifier; reference [47] cites private communication, which is not independently verifiable and should be flagged as such in the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the H to 8f limit is a reproduction-and-recast anchored to external ATLAS data, not an identity with its inputs.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain: the paper's first result is a reproduction of ATLAS's Z to 6f limits. The recalibration factors rlep = 0.78 and rtrig = 0.81 are fitted to ATLAS's public Monte Carlo study (Tables 1 and 2), and the reproduction is benchmarked against ATLAS's published expected and observed limits (Fig. 4). The subsequent H to 8f recast uses the same truth-level Monte Carlo procedure with a full H to aa to VVVV to 8f simulation, ATLAS public background bins, the CLs method, and an independently estimated theoretical uncertainty. The H to 8f branching-fraction limit is not defined in terms of, nor fitted to, the Z to 6f result. The paper's explicit transfer of rlep and rtrig 'for simplicity' from Z to 6f to the new topology (Section 4) is a modeling extrapolation with a large stated systematic uncertainty (sigma_epsilon = 0.59), not a logical loop: if the transfer is wrong the limit is wrong, but it is not wrong by construction. Hidden-valley references such as Strassler-Zurek and the companion-paper note are contextual or forward-looking and do not carry the argument. No equation equates the predicted limit to an input, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The low-mass isolation caveats raised in Sections 4 and 5 are correctness risks, not circularity evidence.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central limit depends on two fitted recalibration constants and on the assumed width of a log-normal systematic; these are the main ad hoc inputs. The paper invents no new particles: 'a' and 'V' are generic placeholders from prior hidden sector frameworks, and the dark photon branching fractions come from the external DarkCast package. The background model is inherited entirely from ATLAS.

free parameters (3)
  • rlep = 0.78
    Per-lepton reconstruction and isolation recalibration factor, chosen so that simulated efficiencies match the ATLAS MC study (Table 2) at m_hD = 50 GeV for mA' = 8, 15, 20 GeV.
  • rtrig = 0.81
    Trigger recalibration factor, chosen to match the ATLAS MC study's post-cut-flow trigger efficiency (Table 2).
  • sigma_epsilon = 0.59 for Z -> 6f; ~0.59 for H -> 8f
    Overall log-normal systematic uncertainty on signal efficiency, defined in Eq. (3.5) as the combination of sigma_trig = 0.12, four sigma_lep = 0.56, and sigma_theo = 0.14 (or 0.16 for H -> 8f). This width directly sets the looseness of the final limits.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption ATLAS background estimates Bi and their systematic uncertainties sigma_B,i in the m_lbar_l bins (from Ref. [30]) are correct and applicable to the H -> 8f signal selection.
    Used in Eqs. (3.1) to (3.4) and in the CLs limit calculation; the recast inherits the ATLAS background model without independent validation.
  • ad hoc to paper Constant recalibration factors rlep and rtrig, extracted at m_hD = 50 GeV for Z -> 6f, describe all relevant detector effects for H -> 8f events with different boost and collimation.
    Stated in Section 4: 'we take the recalibration factors and their uncertainties be the same as for Z -> 6f'; the paper acknowledges this is crude in Section 3.1.1.
  • domain assumption Pileup subtraction in the ATLAS data is effective enough that the pileup-free ATLAS MC study measures the relevant efficiencies.
    Section 3.1.3 states the authors cannot quantify this uncertainty and assume it is small compared to other systematics.
  • ad hoc to paper Log-normal distributions for nuisance parameters delta_epsilon and delta_B (Eq. 3.4) adequately model the systematic uncertainties.
    Chosen to keep yields positive; not validated against data beyond the reproduction exercise.
  • domain assumption V has the branching fractions of a dark photon as computed with DarkCast (Fig. 3), and BR(a -> VV) = 1.
    Stated in Section 4; the limits are quoted under this assumption, and the paper notes rescaling would be needed for other V decay patterns.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Limits on an Exotic Higgs Decay From a Recast ATLAS Four-Lepton Analysis." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/DSTYEKQR

@misc{pith2026241214452,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Limits on an Exotic Higgs Decay From a Recast ATLAS Four-Lepton Analysis},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/DSTYEKQR}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.14452}
}
abstract

The ATLAS collaboration, using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV collisions from the Large Hadron Collider, has placed limits on the decay of a $Z$ boson to three dark photons. We reproduce the results of the ATLAS analysis, and then recast it as a limit on a exotic Higgs decay mode, in which the Higgs boson decays via a pair of intermediate (pseudo)scalars $a$ to four dark photons $V$ (or some other spin-one meson). Across the mass range for $m_a$ and $m_V$, we find limits on the exotic Higgs branching fraction BR$(H\to aa \to VVVV)$ in the range of $4\times 10^{-5}$ to $1 \times 10^{-4}$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Sub-GeV dark matter and multi-decay signatures from dark showers at beam-dump experiments

    hep-ph 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    SHiP could observe multiple displaced vertices per event from dark rho mesons in dark showers, probing dark rho masses up to ~2 GeV and discriminating the model from dark photons.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [31]

    The Platinum Channel: Higgs Decays to as many as 8 Leptons

    E. Izaguirre and D. Stolarski,Searching for Higgs Decays to as Many as 8 Leptons, Phys. Rev. Lett.121 (2018) 221803 [1805.12136]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  2. [1]

    ATLAScollaboration, A detailed map of Higgs boson interactions by the ATLAS experiment ten years after the discovery, Nature 607 (2022) 52 [2207.00092]. – 18 –

    arXiv 2022

  3. [2]

    CMS collaboration, A portrait of the Higgs boson by the CMS experiment ten years after the discovery., Nature 607 (2022) 60 [2207.00043]

    arXiv 2022

  4. [3]

    Curtin et al.,Exotic decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson, Phys

    D. Curtin et al.,Exotic decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson, Phys. Rev. D90 (2014) 075004 [1312.4992]

    arXiv 2014

  5. [4]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson decays into a pair of pseudoscalar particles in thebbµµ final state with the ATLAS detector inpp collisions at√s=13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D105 (2022) 012006 [2110.00313]

    arXiv 2022

  6. [5]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for the Higgs boson produced in association with a vector boson and decaying into two spin-zero particles in theH → aa → 4b channel in pp collisions at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 10 (2018) 031 [1806.07355]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  7. [6]

    CMS collaboration, Search for an exotic decay of the Higgs boson to a pair of light pseudoscalars in the final state of two muons and twoτ leptons in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV, JHEP 11 (2018) 018 [1805.04865]

    arXiv 2018

  8. [7]

    CMS collaboration, Search for an exotic decay of the Higgs boson to a pair of light pseudoscalars in the final state with two b quarks and twoτ leptons in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B785 (2018) 462 [1805.10191]

    arXiv 2018

Show all 55 references
  1. [8]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson decays into two new low-mass spin-0 particles in the 4b channel with the ATLAS detector usingpp collisions at √s = 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020) 112006 [2005.12236]

    2020 arXiv

  2. [9]

    CMS collaboration, Search for a light pseudoscalar Higgs boson in the boostedµµτ τ final state in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 08 (2020) 139 [2005.08694]

    2020 arXiv

  3. [10]

    CMS collaboration, Search for low-mass dilepton resonances in Higgs boson decays to four-lepton final states in proton–proton collisions at√s = 13TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C82 (2022) 290 [2111.01299]

    2022 arXiv

  4. [11]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs bosons decaying into new spin-0 or spin-1 particles in four-lepton final states with the ATLAS detector with 139 fb−1 of pp collision data at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 03 (2022) 041 [2110.13673]

    2022 arXiv

  5. [12]

    CMS collaboration, Search for exotic Higgs boson decaysH → AA →4γ with events containing two merged diphotons in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023) 101801 [2209.06197]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [13]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for the decay of the Higgs boson to aZ boson and a light pseudoscalar particle decaying to two photons, Phys. Lett. B850 (2024) 138536 [2312.01942]

    2024 arXiv

  7. [14]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for short- and long-lived axion-like particles in – 19 – H → aa → 4γ decays with the ATLAS experiment at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024) 742 [2312.03306]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [15]

    CMS collaboration, Search for the decay of the Higgs boson to a pair of light pseudoscalar bosons in the final state with four bottom quarks in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV, JHEP 06 (2024) 097 [2403.10341]

    2024 arXiv

  9. [16]

    CMS collaboration, Search for new resonances decaying to pairs of merged diphotons in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, 2405.00834

    arXiv

  10. [17]

    CMS collaboration, Search for light pseudoscalar bosons produced in Higgs boson decays in the 4τ and 2µ2τ final states in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV,

  11. [18]

    CMS collaboration, Search for exotic decays of the Higgs boson to a pair of pseudoscalars in theµµbb and τ τbb final states, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024) 493 [2402.13358]

    2024 arXiv

  12. [19]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for decays of the Higgs boson into a pair of pseudoscalar particles decaying into bb¯τ+τ- using pp collisions at s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 052013 [2407.01335]

    2024 arXiv

  13. [20]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson decays into aZ boson and a light hadronically decaying resonance in 140 fb−1 of 13 TeVpp collisions with the ATLAS detector, 2411.16361

    arXiv

  14. [21]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for new light gauge bosons in Higgs boson decays to four-lepton final states inpp collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 092001 [1505.07645]

    2015 arXiv

  15. [22]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for Higgs boson decays to beyond-the-Standard-Model light bosons in four-lepton events with the ATLAS detector at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 06 (2018) 166 [1802.03388]

    2018 arXiv

  16. [23]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for supersymmetry in events with four or more charged leptons in 139 fb−1 of √s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 07 (2021) 167 [2103.11684]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [24]

    CMS collaboration, Search for leptophobic Z’ bosons decaying into four-lepton final states in proton–proton collisions at√s =8TeV, Phys. Lett. B773 (2017) 563 [1701.01345]

    2017 arXiv

  18. [25]

    ATLAScollaboration, A search for prompt lepton-jets inpp collisions at √s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 02 (2016) 062 [1511.05542]

    2016 arXiv

  19. [26]

    CMS collaboration, A search for pair production of new light bosons decaying into muons in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B796 (2019) 131 [1812.00380]. – 20 –

    2019 arXiv

  20. [27]

    CMS collaboration, Search for Light Resonances Decaying into Pairs of Muons as a Signal of New Physics, JHEP 07 (2011) 098 [1106.2375]

    2011 arXiv

  21. [28]

    CMS collaboration, Search for a Non-Standard-Model Higgs Boson Decaying to a Pair of New Light Bosons in Four-Muon Final States, Phys. Lett. B726 (2013) 564 [1210.7619]

    2013 arXiv

  22. [29]

    CMS collaboration, A search for pair production of new light bosons decaying into muons, Phys. Lett. B752 (2016) 146 [1506.00424]

    2016 arXiv

  23. [30]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for dark photons in rareZ boson decays with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023) 251801 [2306.07413]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek,Echoes of a hidden valley at hadron colliders, Phys. Lett. B 651 (2007) 374 [hep-ph/0604261]

    2007 arXiv

  25. [33]

    R. M. Schabinger and J. D. Wells,A Minimal spontaneously broken hidden sector and its impact on Higgs boson physics at the large hadron collider, Phys. Rev. D72 (2005) 093007 [hep-ph/0509209]

    2005 arXiv

  26. [34]

    ATLAScollaboration, Performance of the ATLAS muon triggers in Run 2, JINST 15 (2020) P09015 [2004.13447]

    2020 arXiv

  27. [35]

    ATLAScollaboration, Performance of electron and photon triggers in ATLAS during LHC Run 2, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020) 47 [1909.00761]

    2020 arXiv

  28. [36]

    ATLAScollaboration, Muon reconstruction performance of the ATLAS detector in proton–proton collision data at√s =13 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016) 292 [1603.05598]

    2016 arXiv

  29. [37]

    ATLAScollaboration, Electron and photon performance measurements with the ATLAS detector using the 2015–2017 LHC proton-proton collision data, JINST 14 (2019) P12006 [1908.00005]

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    ATLAScollaboration, Muon reconstruction and identification efficiency in ATLAS using the full Run 2pp collision data set at√s = 13 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C81 (2021) 578 [2012.00578]

    2021 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Gopalakrishna, S

    S. Gopalakrishna, S. Jung and J. D. Wells,Higgs boson decays to four fermions through an abelian hidden sector, Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 055002 [0801.3456]

    2008 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Baruch, P

    C. Baruch, P. Ilten, Y. Soreq and M. Williams,Axial vectors in DarkCast, JHEP 11 (2022) 124 [2206.08563]

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Auxiliary Materials

    ATLAScollaboration, “Auxiliary Materials.” https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PAPERS/HDBS-2019-32. – 21 –

    2019

  34. [42]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer et al.,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP 07 (2014) 079 [1405.0301]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Sjöstrand, S

    T. Sjöstrand, S. Ask, J. R. Christiansen, R. Corke, N. Desai, P. Ilten et al.,An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput. Phys. Commun.191 (2015) 159 [1410.3012]

    2015 arXiv

  36. [44]

    ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes to 7 TeV data

    ATLAScollaboration, “ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes to 7 TeV data.” https://cds.cern.ch/record/1966419, 2014

    2014

  37. [45]

    NNPDF collaboration, Parton distributions for the LHC Run II, JHEP 04 (2015) 040 [1410.8849]

    2015 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Curtin, R

    D. Curtin, R. Essig, S. Gori and J. Shelton,Illuminating Dark Photons with High-Energy Colliders, JHEP 02 (2015) 157 [1412.0018]

    2015 arXiv

  39. [47]

    ATLAScollaboration, Private communication, 2023

    2023

  40. [48]

    Junk,Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics, Nucl

    T. Junk,Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A434 (1999) 435 [hep-ex/9902006]

    1999 arXiv

  41. [49]

    A. L. Read,Presentation of search results: TheCLs technique, J. Phys. G 28 (2002) 2693

    2002

  42. [50]

    Cowan, K

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross and O. Vitells,Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C71 (2011) 1554 [1007.1727]

    2011 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Karlberg et al.,Ad interim recommendations for the Higgs boson production cross sections at √s = 13.6 TeV, 2402.09955

    A. Karlberg et al.,Ad interim recommendations for the Higgs boson production cross sections at √s = 13.6 TeV, 2402.09955

    arXiv

  44. [52]

    X. Chen, T. Gehrmann, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss, Y. Li, D. Neill et al.,Precise QCD Description of the Higgs Boson Transverse Momentum Spectrum, Phys. Lett. B788 (2019) 425 [1805.00736]

    2019 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector, 1610.07922

    LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group collaboration, Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4. Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector, 1610.07922

    arXiv

  46. [54]

    CMS collaboration, Model-independent search for pair production of new bosons decaying into muons in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, 2407.20425

    arXiv

  47. [55]

    ATLAScollaboration, Search for a new scalar decaying into new spin-1 bosons in four-lepton final states with the ATLAS detector, 2410.16781. – 22 –

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.